Why single out Mantha? Mantha is, at best, the next JVR. That's worth something but its not going to get you a defenseman worth acquiring without another substantial asset added. Literally anyone else not named Larkin should be on the table for the right defenseman. Obviously, you think harder about trading Zadina and whether or not sending off Cholowski is robbing Peter to pay Paul, but if the situation is right, that trigger should be pulled. We're already bottoming this organization out and yet we still don't have a top pairing defenseman in sight nor one calling our name from the high ranks of the 2019 draft board.

But to answer OP directly, I would trade as much as the following:

Mantha
Veleno
1st in '21 or '22 (Wings choice)

Not sure if there is a defenseman available who is worth that much but if that's what it took to get our man, I'd do it.

Click to expand...

Not trying to single him out, he just seems like the most logical trade chip that actually has value... no?

Bingo. Better to swing a move than "wait it out" for free agency, since you're going to get scorched waiting it out.

Click to expand...

I think youre better to wait it out for probably at least this season. Let at least one more draft play out and add more talent. Then the next season you think about seriously adding a D but also see whats going to be available in UFA. WHat does a good dman do for detroit right now? Ruin the tank and then we lose 2 or 3 years off their deal before the rest of the team is ready to be competitive.

For the right D if youre getting a good deal sure do it. But theres definitely not a rush to trade for Trouba when he'll be a UFA soon on a team with a lot of guys to pay coming up. Adding him in 2020 would almost be perfect timing

People on here are soooooo SNARKY! Like they just know more or are better.. Ok smarty smart smarts... We'll see if Trouba is even available in two years and if we're around I'll bow down and say you're the smartest poster here.

For those still clamoring on trading Mantha for a Dman...on the Bolts board, they want Mikhail Sergachev benched for at least a game, as he hasn't been upto par this year. Apparently still driving some offense, but bad decisions, turnovers, soft play & subpar effort are among the reasons listed in the Sergachev player discussion thread. They want to replace him with Slater Koekoek!

Mantha could be an option. You would have to trade a good prospect to get a good prospect. They definitely need defense, whether or not they have to get it through a trade mid-season, rather than through the draft I'm not sure.

They are 0.93 goals per game behind the league per game GF average, while 1.74 goals per game above the league GA per game average. So, even if they could average another goal per game, it wouldn't make up for the average number of goals they are giving up. If they could average another goal per game (which would bring them over the league's per game GF average), they would still be a losing team.

Mantha is lazy. Nobody can change my mind. I watch him and I see ZERO hustle. He expects goals to just come to him without effort. Trade him if he wants to depend solely on Larkin to get a little dirty for some performance.

Mantha could be an option. You would have to trade a good prospect to get a good prospect. They definitely need defense, whether or not they have to get it through a trade mid-season, rather than through the draft I'm not sure.

They are 0.93 goals per game behind the league per game GF average, while 1.74 goals per game above the league GA per game average. So, even if they could average another goal per game, it wouldn't make up for the average number of goals they are giving up. If they could average another goal per game (which would bring them over the league's per game GF average), they would still be a losing team.

Click to expand...

I mean that only works if you think that scoring an extra goal a game wouldn't have any kind of effect on the possession numbers. If you score more, you're most likely doing better with possession. If you're doing better with possession, the other team isn't getting as much pressure on you. If they aren't getting as much pressure on you, then they probably aren't scoring as much. And vice versa.

Chicken or the egg.

Will adding a defenseman make the defense as a whole better, allowing for the offense to have the puck more?

or

Will adding better forwards take pressure and responsibility off of the defense/goalie?

The problem is he is either truly a lazy player and we cant get anything for him, I would not give Cholo for him for example. Or it's he just does not fit with the system/coaching? I don't want to just give him away for nothing just yet.

I mean that only works if you think that scoring an extra goal a game wouldn't have any kind of effect on the possession numbers. If you score more, you're most likely doing better with possession. If you're doing better with possession, the other team isn't getting as much pressure on you. If they aren't getting as much pressure on you, then they probably aren't scoring as much. And vice versa.

Chicken or the egg.

Will adding a defenseman make the defense as a whole better, allowing for the offense to have the puck more?

or

Will adding better forwards take pressure and responsibility off of the defense/goalie?

Click to expand...

They need both offensive and defensive improvement, that's what I see. What I wrote in quotations was based on yesterday's numbers (before any game was played), but .93 is like 53.4% of 1.74. So, they are more behind on defense than on offense as a matter of fact. However, I think to improve both is the only realistic way to get competitive again. Also, I think it's more about adding the right type of players, rather than just any defender.

Notice also that you could ask the same question about better defense reliving pressure to score more goals.

Why single out Mantha? Mantha is, at best, the next JVR. That's worth something but its not going to get you a defenseman worth acquiring without another substantial asset added. Literally anyone else not named Larkin should be on the table for the right defenseman. Obviously, you think harder about trading Zadina and whether or not sending off Cholowski is robbing Peter to pay Paul, but if the situation is right, that trigger should be pulled. We're already bottoming this organization out and yet we still don't have a top pairing defenseman in sight nor one calling our name from the high ranks of the 2019 draft board.

But to answer OP directly, I would trade as much as the following:

Mantha
Veleno
1st in '21 or '22 (Wings choice)

Not sure if there is a defenseman available who is worth that much but if that's what it took to get our man, I'd do it.

Click to expand...

Mantha, Veleno and a first??? Who are we targeting, Seth Jones? Dahlin? Provorov? Werenski?

You missed the point of my post. Of course I don't think we would get those guys.

Click to expand...

Well, it's closer to being fair for Trouba than it is for the guys you listed... IMO.

Dougie Hamilton returned a 1st and two 2nd's, and that was seen as a bargain. Trouba could probably return something pretty good. Guys like Mantha and Veleno probably don't hold as much value in a trade as we think they might.

They need both offensive and defensive improvement, that's what I see. What I wrote in quotations was based on yesterday's numbers (before any game was played), but .93 is like 53.4% of 1.74. So, they are more behind on defense than on offense as a matter of fact. However, I think to improve both is the only realistic way to get competitive again. Also, I think it's more about adding the right type of players, rather than just any defender.

Notice also that you could ask the same question about better defense reliving pressure to score more goals.

Click to expand...

-Yes they both need improvements but the defense needs time to develop (years) more so that directly improved.

-Yes improving both would certainly make us competitive again but trading Mantha isn't going to make the offense more competitive.

-And yes I know I posted both sides the argument. I believe in the second option. There. Cleared that up.

Honestly, this back and forth doesn't matter really. Nothing has to be fixed now. Or in the next two weeks. Or next month. If we're having his convo 3 years from now, then I'm taking your side.

That is a pretty extreme example, no? Like everyone in the world new the Oilers were desperate for a dman so they oilers had no leverage. No one was going to make a trade with the oilers that the oilers would "win."

There were also external factors the oilers valued: Specifically Larsson being locked in for a cap[ hit of 4.1 Million for 5 years at the trade. Also Hallsy had a major breakout after the trade which kind of skews perceptions on the value.

That is a pretty extreme example, no? Like everyone in the world new the Oilers were desperate for a dman so they oilers had no leverage. No one was going to make a trade with the oilers that the oilers would "win."

There were also external factors the oilers valued: Specifically Larsson being locked in for a cap[ hit of 4.1 Million for 5 years at the trade. Also Hallsy had a major breakout after the trade which kind of skews perceptions on the value.